Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Just sent this to NYTimes, USAToday, Washington post.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:13 PM
Original message
Just sent this to NYTimes, USAToday, Washington post.
If you guys think it's worth a media blast, have fun.

I think it's a pretty damn solid case. Comments?

--------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to bring to your attention solid, documented evidence that President Bush committed a federal offense defrauding the U.S. military on his National Guard application in 1968. Specifically, he witheld from the military the existence of a prior incident with the police which he was required to disclose. An article 83 violation of the UCMJ which carries a maximum sentence of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay, and 2 years prison time.

In the president's National Guard application he was required to disclose in full, right down to minor traffic violations, any previous activity involving law enforcement. If he was so much as detained by police it was mandatory that he disclose in full that information:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/3-Grade_Determination.pdf (Page 37, bottom of page)

"19. Have you ever been detained, held, arrested, indicted, or summoned into court as a defendent..."

This information was used both for consideration of his fitness as an officer candidate and for purposes of conducting his security clearance background check. (A pilot candidate required a 'SECRET' security clearance, and this was time of war.)

According to numerous reliable media sources, including your own paper:

Washington Post:

http://www.dke.org/bushyaletimes.html

USAToday:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-02-11-bush-guard-usat_x.htm

NY Times:

http://www.dke.org/bushyaletimes.html


...the president was either detained or arrested by Princeton police in 1967 for participating in a small post football game riot in which the Princeton goalposts were torn down. If either is true, and I have found no evidence that it is not as the president even makes mention of the incident himself in his own biography "A Charge to Keep" (although he of course describes it as a bit of harmless fun), then the president was absolutely required to inform the armed forces of that incident on his application when he applied for his Guard slot. It would seem careless of him to mention the incident at all in light of this information... but then his Guard records weren't public when the bio was written.

Information pertaining to that detention/arrest is completely missing from all his Guard paperwork. If he had left off mention of a traffic ticket or something similar then it might be argued that it was a harmless slip of the memory… but instead he comprehensively lists all his minor infractions, down to $10 speeding tickets from 1964, and then withheld the fact that he had been detained by police for participating in a small riot in an incident the Princeton police apparently felt was serious enough to warrant running him out of town completely, LESS THAN A YEAR before submitting his guard application. As both his most serious AND his most recent encounter with law enforcement it would be difficult to argue (although I'm certain the attempt will be made) that this omission in disclosure sections of his application accompanied by warnings of penalties and repercussions for non-disclosure and containing a signed statement by the president that he had been counseled regarding those consequences, was somehow the result of a failure to remember that this arrest had happened or an accidental oversight. The content of what was disclosed is further evidence against the non-disclosure being accidental or the result of poor memory.

$10 speeding tickets from 1964 were remembered and included. Minor traffic collisions also got disclosed. His arrest at Yale for the small infraction of stealing a hotel Christmas wreath (the charges were dropped) was also included, however it was accompanied by a note that a Yale security official would vouch for the harmlessness of the 'prank'… something Bush was unlikely to get from the Princeton police, as it was NOT a harmless offense he committed there. If some military investigator were to call the Princeton authorities they might hear descriptions like "mob", "riot" or "destruction of property"... it is clear that only the information which stood the best chance of seeing Bush's application rejected (and which also stood the least chance of being discovered by any background check) failed to appear on that application.

The withholding was obviously never discovered (the investigators would have had no reason to check with Princeton authorities, and this was not the day of google searches and well-integrated criminal databases, so there was little risk of discovery at the time) and it is now too late to prosecute in any case as the statute of limitations on the crime is well past... but the fact remains that the lengths the president went to to get into the Guard went well past exerting family influence or having it exerted on his behalf. In order to avoid combat duty in Vietnam he committed a federal offense to get into the National Guard and completely solid documentation of this fact exists and is in plain public view. The Guard may very well have denied him entry as a pilot if this more serious information had been disclosed to them despite any influence being wielded behind the scenes on the president's behalf by a certain Texas Speaker of the House. It at the very least would have made his job considerably more difficult. After all, it was already a matter of convincing them to take someone with no piloting experience or qualifications whatsoever and a 25% pilot aptitude score into a coveted pilot slot... and while 25% may be the MINIMUM acceptable score the Air Force highly recommends any aspiring pilot score at least in the 70s.

Listed below are links to all the relevant documentation. By all means please do fact check the details for yourself before reporting the story. I will be forwarding this information to several major news services... and I would hope, once the accuracy of this information has been verified, that it will be reported to the public as it seems to me that this should be of considerably more concern than just exactly how seriously John Kerry was wounded while serving his *volunteered for* combat duty in the war and whether or not he lost quite enough of his blood during that service to satisfy some people's sense of propriety regarding the awarding of purple hearts.

Also, given this information I would think it prudent that someone also check into why the president's "25" score on his pilot aptitude test does not appear to be his original one. A different score has been clearly scribbled out and another written in it's place and initialed by the test control officer. This is curious, since to the best of my knowledge candidates are not permitted to retake the test for a minimum of 180 days, and if the new score was a result of retaking the test that means it would have had to be taken AFTER Bush had already been accepted as a pilot, which would be a bizarre time to be retaking a qualification test to say the least. However, if it is not a result of retaking the test... what justified the change? The old score is completely obscured and illegible but you’ll excuse me for harboring doubts that it was a downward revision.

If you should decide to move forward with this story I would only ask one thing. As a courtesy, please e-mail me and let me know in advance when you will be running the story so that I can be sure not to miss it.

Thank you for your time.

-Grant Comeau

First required disclosure:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/1-Enlistment_Packet.pdf (Page 14):

Notice that at the bottom of the page is the (signed) statement that Bush has been informed by his recruiting officer of the consequences of withholding information.

Second required disclosure:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/3-Grade_Determination.pdf (Page 18)

Third required disclosure:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/3-Grade_Determination.pdf (Page 20)

Fourth required disclosure (Here we see that Bush has a Yale official willing to inform anyone asking that the arrest he DID disclose was for a harmless “prank”.):

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/3-Grade_Determination.pdf (Page 37)

His arrest waiver:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/bushdocs/10-3_2000_Personnel_File.pdf (Page 8)

Article 83:

www.jag.navy.mil/documents/mcm2000.pdf (page 285-286)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Woah! KICKING & NOMINATING!!! Wow! Good Job!!!
Edited on Thu Sep-09-04 06:22 PM by IdaBriggs
On Edit: AND WELCOME TO DU!!! My Hero!!! :) :) :) :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thanks. :)
I've talked this over with a friend of mine who's an assistant DA and he consulted a friend of his who's a former JAG lawyer and they both think it's trouble for shrub... :)

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. How on earth did you figure all of this out???
That is some AMAZING research!!! And very well written, too!!! I'm serious -- You Are My Hero!!! :hug: :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
26. Wasn't really anything TO figure out.
It was all right out in the open. I was just browsing through Bush's records one day, saw the arrest disclosure, and thought... "hey... didn't I read somewhere that Bush was arrested TWICE in college?"

So I went looking.

Then when I found enough indicators that he had ben at the very least held or detained at Princeton I went looking for just how serious it was to conceal that information.

USAToday alone already had every peice of info I posted except what specific article of the UCMJ this violated, it looks like they just didn't notice it. They'd printed an article saying he was arrested at Princeton, they'd printed an article specifically about his criminal disclosures... it was just that when they did it those disclosures were still blacked out so they were speculating about covered up info on drug arrests. That's actually what forced the white house to release the non-blacked out records, they had to kill that before it got started.

Then when there was no drug related arrest info under there it looks like they just shrugged and moved on.

-Grant

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cthrumatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. well when it rains it pours...from your lips to Gods ears...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stew225 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Stellar job, to say the least. I'd give my life to
see this come to the proper attention. Let me know if you need my life. Great job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Gardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. 2 years prison time
That would be like a dream come true. Hope somebody in the media will give this some attention. Did you send to the Kerry campaign, Michael Moore and Greg Palast?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progressive420 Donating Member (213 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
7. Excellent WORK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_in_GA Donating Member (439 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Wow!
Excellent work!! :toast:

And now, a dumb newbie question: is there a prepared "media blast" list? If so, where, and how do I access it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
20. check out Campaign Underground at the top of the lobby page
it rocks :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_in_GA Donating Member (439 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #20
34. Thanks!
I'll check it out...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. Wow!
Well done!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
10. Excellent work.
I suggest you send it to the Chicago Tribune as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abrock Donating Member (333 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. Wow!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
12. Super Important KICK!!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
13. Kicking
Please keep us posted.:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blkeyedszn Donating Member (54 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Damn, I'm impressed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #15
44. Hi blkeyedszn!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mizmoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
14. kick ass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heath.Hunnicutt Donating Member (454 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
16. Be careful, you are a little off-base here...
Edited on Thu Sep-09-04 07:54 PM by Heath.Hunnicutt
The problem is this:

There is a distinction between being detained, arrested, or held by law enforcement.

LE can detain you for questioning if they have probable cause. Otherwise they can merely question you if you cooperate.

Being arrested is stronger than being detained. Not only are you not free to go, you are accused by the police of a crime for which you must be arraigned.

If you are "held" then you are locked up, whether because you have been arrested, remanded, committed, or convicted.

It is going to be impossible to prove Bush was detained without an eye witness. It's also completely possible that Bush was not legally detained, but was merely questioned and not detained.

Only the third form you reference includes being detained by law enforcement as well as either held or arrested. So that is the only document he could possibly have completed incorrectly over this matter.

What's worse, the antic in question is funny and endearing. I don't think it is going to help us a lot to bring this up.

I hate to write a discouraging post like this, because I love the effort you made. I just don't want to see you get smacked down for this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #16
25. Third form includes "detained": that's enough
why enough isnt enough , is beyond me.

If bush lied on one form, that is plenty.

I dont see the antic as endearing or funny.

Oscar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #16
27. I appreciate the distinction...
...between being arrested, detained and held, but he has to disclose *all of the above*. So it doesn't matter which it was so long as it was any of them.

The three papers I sent this to had all already previously reported he had been either arrested or detained at that incident, I'm guessing they had a reason. And I did invite them to fact check for themselves after all.

As for "funny and endearing"... the Christmas wreath incident is funny and endearing. Participating in a small post-game riot, getting run out of town by the police for it, and then lying about it to the armed forces to avoid combat duty during wartime is anything but funny or endearing.

And one document is enough. Lying on any of them is a federal offense. The other disclosures are included to show he didn't tell them about it in any of them either.

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heath.Hunnicutt Donating Member (454 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #27
49. Ok, I see your point
A Federal Offense is a Federal Offense; you're right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
17. Send it to the Boston Globe reporter who has been doing all the research
on this topic and broke the fact that * didn't sign up in Mass for the NG like he was supposed to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #17
30. If anyone has his e-mail...
...I'll do that immediately.

Can't find it on the globe website.

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_in_GA Donating Member (439 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. Boston Globe reporter contact info
Robinson, Walter V
Editor
Spotlight / News (617) 929-3048
wrobinson@globe.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. Thanks! E-mail sent...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertDevereaux Donating Member (640 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
18. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andromeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
19. You put a lot of work into this..
This deserves a nomination:wow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
21. Okay, you need a better title for this thread...
People are just skipping it. Please change the Subject line using your edit button. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. I would change it...
...but the editting period expired.

Anyone actually clicking on the original title and reading this has my official permission to steal any and all info here and spread it around anywhere they like of course.

And they can give it any title they like too. :)

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
22. Welcome to DU, GComeau!
Love the name!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #22
29. Good to be here.
>Love the name!

Thanks. It was a gift from my parents. :)

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chomskyite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-09-04 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
23. I'm sorry to say it . . .
. . . because obviously you did a lot of work here, but this is small potatoes.

Just how many of these omissions are prosecuted? Or even noticed?

This wouldn't even rise to the level of knowing falsification if Bush could say he did not think he had been detained after the goal-post incident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. chomskyite wrong: i am impressed: no way bush could have thought he
Edited on Fri Sep-10-04 03:23 AM by oscar111
was not detained. Or possibly arrested, as the case may be.

Clearly bush omitted relevant data from the application in order to sneak into a program.

Aftergame riots are still in the news now and then. They dont look like harmless pranks to me. Sometimes they lead to fatal fights.. and usually they lead to destruction of cars {fires} and storewindows.

If the cops forced bush out of town, that is most interesting.

The pilot score alteration is extremely interesting. Soros, now is the time for money on the table to loosen the tongue of whoever altered the pilot score.

Ignore chomskyite's objections, ... they are groundless. Recently i have seen a lot of groundless posts.

PS in that same vein, see my answer to heather hunnicutt, many replies upward... look for my name in the name column.. oscar.

For clarity, you might want to break up some of the longer sentences, especially those which include parenthetical comments.
I recall about 2 or 3 such long sentences. At the beginning, you might put a brief "Abstract", and at the end, a short "Summary" giving your most damning core charges. Such as "bush lied on the third application form by leaving out his detention by police during a riot."

Your original post knocked my socks off. The excellent scholarship is impressive. If we had 100 clones of you, the election would end up
75:25, our favor! I nominated this for the homepage.
Oscar111
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gauguin57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #24
43. It depends on what your definition of IS is ...
:evilgrin: :evilgrin: :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 07:04 AM
Response to Original message
31. Kick!
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Papa Donating Member (505 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
32. Excellent . If we had a liberal media, they would be all over this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
33. It Was Detention, as Defined in the Docs....
Per the the Washington Post:

http://www.dke.org/bushyaletimes.html

"The theft of the Christmas wreath appears to have been Mr. Bush's first tangle with the police, but it was not the last. A year after that arrest, he was attending a football game at Princeton and cheering for his DKE brothers on the Yale team. At the end of the game, he and other students charged onto the football field and tried to knock down the goal posts, seizing pieces as souvenirs.

"The Princeton police tried to re-establish order and caught Mr. Bush brazenly sitting on a crossbar of a goal post, determinedly trying to pry off a piece for himself. The police seized him (my bold), interrogated him and finally released him on the condition that he leave Princeton by dusk.

He has never been back."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
36. Excellent. I've nominated your thread for the DU Home page
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #36
38. Ahhh.. THAT'S what nominations are for...
I was just about to ask.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #38
48. Oh, btw....
Since this is just the copy of the letter I sent to one of those reporters if it did get put on the home page I'd like to rewrite it a little to put it in a more appropriate format for a website posting.

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grannylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
39. You should also send it to NPR, FSTV, Air America, and PBS...
if they start covering it, the mainstream media might feel more compelled to at least make some mention of it.
Well done indeed!
Too bad the "journalists" working for the "liberal media" don't seem to have the fact-checking abilities that you do!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. From your lips....nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_in_GA Donating Member (439 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. kick!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
42. Thsis post and Will Pitt's post need to remain at the top of the page
Even if I have to keep them both kicked all week long!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Maybe I should just repost....
...with a more provocative title? ;)

How about "Bush committed federal offense to avoid combat duty in Vietnam!"

No wait....

"Bush committed federal offense to avoid combat duty in Vietnam!!!!!!!"

Yeah, that oughta do it.

-Grant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K8-EEE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
45. KICK! A Felon? PURGE HIS NAME FROM THE BALLOT!
great!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
46. And again, KICK. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
50. Give this info. to CBS.
They seem to be the only ones doing any real reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
51. I sent this thread to CBS. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-10-04 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. I e-mailed them too a few hours ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katusha Donating Member (592 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
53. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Digit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
54. We need more people like you!!!!!!
Great sleuthing, and terrific followthrough!:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
55. A lifetime of special treatment
You make a compelling case.

There seems to be a PATTERN of fratboy receiving extra-special treatment. (Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose document his charmed business life in "Shrub: the short but happy political life of..."

What we have here is a pattern. A pattern of incompetence, and a pattern of coverup.

This man has no actual achievements. I think he is a complete fraud. Yesterday there was a thread on some AP documents showing how the fraud was flying training jets before he was grounded. I'm starting to think he was never a pilot any more than he was a business man.

He's nothing but a cover story. You open the book and there's NOTHING there.

Thanks for doing the work that hundreds of telejournalists should be doing.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AmerDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
56. Nice job, now lets see where it goes!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
57. Keep this one kicked all day and night!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 03:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC